To make high-quality research more accessible and easier to explore.

Fields:
3 results ✕ Clear filters

Ex dividend day stock price behavior: discreteness or tax-induced clienteles?

Journal of Financial Economics 1998 47(2), 127-159 open access
Since prices are constrained to discrete tick multiples while dividends are essentially continuous, ex day price changes will not equal dividends. We argue that the expected price drop is strictly less than the dividend but within one tick of the dividend. The price-drop-to-dividend ratio will (i) be less than one, (ii) increase with dividends generally, and (iii) decline between tick multiples, giving a sawtooth pattern in the data. Since dividends and dividend yields are highly correlated, discreteness will give the impression of tax-induced dividend clienteles even if there are none. Taxable cash dividends and nontaxable stock dividends exhibit similar ex day behavior.

Macroeconomic news and bond market volatility1We thank Walter Toshi Baily, Bob Korajczyk, Jim Poterba, Mark Watson, seminar participants at the University of Chicago, Columbia University, Cornell University, and the University of Montreal, and especially Ludger Hentschel (the referee) for helpful comments. We also thank Mark Mitchell for supplying data, and Amy C. Ko and Sydney Ludvigson for research assistance. Lamont was supported by the FMC Faculty Research Fund at the Graduate School of Business, University of Chicago. A portion of this research was completed while Lumsdaine was a National Fellow at the Hoover Institution. We also thank the Financial Research Center at Princeton University for support. A previous version of this paper circulated as `Public Information and the Persistence of Bond Market Volatility'.1

Journal of Financial Economics 1998 47(3), 315-337
We examine the reaction of daily Treasury bond prices to the release of U.S. macroeconomic news. These news releases (of employment and producer price index data) are of interest because they are released on periodic, preannounced dates and because they are associated with substantial bond market volatility. We investigate whether these nonautocorrelated announcements give rise to autocorrelated volatility. We find that announcement-day volatility does not persist at all, consistent with the immediate incorporation of information into prices. We also find a risk premium on these release dates.

Wealth creation versus wealth redistributions in pure stock-for-stock mergers1We are grateful to Tom Arnold, Sanjai Bhagat, James Bicksler, David Blackwell, Ekkehart Boehmer, Ted Bos, Robert Brokaw, Bill Carleton, Bob Comment, Chris Cornwell, Mary Dehner, Bob Eisenbeis, Jimmy Hilliard, Randy Howard, Steve Jones, Ed Kane, Josef Lakonishok, Larry Lang, Bill Lewellen, Marc Lipson, Paul Malatesta, Jeff Netter, Cathy Niden, Volker Pollmann, Annette Poulsen, Jay Ritter, Richard Ruback, Louis Scott, Joe Sinkey, Bill Schwert (the editor), Ralph Walkling (the referee), Ron Warren, J. Fred Weston, Karen Wruck, and seminar participants at the University of Arizona, the University of Delaware, the University of Illinois, the University of Georgia, the University of Miami, Seattle University, the 1995 European Finance Association, the 1996 Financial Management Association, and the 1996 American Finance Association meetings for their helpful comments and recommendations. We also gratefully acknowledge the financial support provided for this project by the University of Georgia Research Foundation. Finally, Steve Henry, Rick McKinney, David Quillian, and Ryan Vaughn provided vital assistance with data collection and assisted with data input.1

Journal of Financial Economics 1998 48(1), 3-33
We examine wealth changes for all 1283 publicly traded debt and equity securities of firms involved in 260 pure stock-for-stock mergers from 1963 to 1996. We find no evidence that conglomerate stock-for-stock mergers create financial synergies or benefit bondholders at stockholders' expense. Instead, we document significant net synergistic gains in nonconglomerate mergers and generally insignificant net gains in conglomerate mergers. Conglomerate bidding-firm stockholders lose; all other securityholders at least break even. Convertible securityholders experience the largest gains, due mostly to their attached option values. Certain bond covenants are value-enhancing while leverage increases are value-reducing.